Media shapes culture, culture shapes society, and society can shape politics. It is cultural examples such as these that really show how influential media can be. Especially in movies that glorify tools to be weapons. Haltman states that there are metaphysical aspect that embody culture.

The writer bring in the view of revolt which runs deep in American culture since really the foundation of America was based on revolutions. This article was most likely published to feature an American audience so by bridging its emotional and cultural history is a great persuasive tactic. Though it never explicitly said revolts the use of slaves and pheasants using machetes as a weapon can imply such. The writer is trying to discretely imply this notion to the reader in order to make them think and have a deeper and more personal connection with the topic.

Object can signify any form of history, culture or emotion depending on how it presented. As Haltman puts it the views on objects can be potentially limitless but why do some views have more significance than the others. Well it all comes down to the culture of it. A recent bate on gun violence have surged popular media both main and social. Historically in America guns were used as a point of self-defense and a balance of power but recent tragedies in Parkland and Las Vegas and any other mass shooting in America has depicted them as killing machines. As practical as a "tool" maybe the cultural significance will always tip the scale to what society depicts it to be.

It amazing to think that a simple farming tool used for corn can become the embodiment for killing and terror. The machete is not the only " tool" this is happened to. The ever so famous ninjas of Japan were actually simple farming tools before the iconized as weapon for Asia most notorious assassins. Small katana were used for slicing crops but have become a trademark weapon for the group. And even scythes that were used for cutting down wheat plants has become culturally a symbol of death held by the grim reaper to rip the souls out of the living. It just goes to show that an object can have two polar ideas based on culture and significance.

A great use of multimodal function here bringing in a book to the argument in hand. It brings in a entire view of American culture into the mix by depicting a machete as weapon. The way that the writer explains it and the picture depicted on the bottom show the machete to be a weapon of terror or fear, as oppose to the tool for survival and nourishment that the history would suggest. So in American culture could it be the a machete signifies weapons and fear more than tools? And considering that the writer he read it in high school it can be assumed that many english classes in throughout that sate even the nation have the same idea about it. As Haltman wrote it's important to know what the object might signify but attention how they might be signify. (4)

These historical contexts make a strong point of evidence to argument. A lot of times when examining a object its historical meaning comes to mind and bringing up dark historical points in America's history of slavery to argument brings up some emotional feelings to the mix. It goes beyond the scholarly talk of an object and expands the idea of the object to further the readers interpretation of it. By using more of these emotional deductions it serves as a bridge to speculation about meaning for the reader. (Haltman 8)

Tools or weapons can be best described in words and how the reader sees the object after that is all dependent on the writers diction and view. In descriptions "writers generate a set of carefully selected nouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, and to effectively determine the bounds pf possible interpretation." (Hatlman 6) Using words such as "violence" or "deadly" will most likely make it seem like a weapon in this instance. More than anything the type of diction that a phrase has can drastically change what the word will mean or what it will mean to the reader.

This section brings up a very interesting point in the argument, though uncommon in the U.S many places outside the U.S use a machete as a tool (especially in tropical rain forrest areas) but in many part of American culture it's depicted as weapons such as movies, video games, and entertainment outlets. This could be what Prown calls a polarity which in turn finds material expression in a language of formal oppositions. That one single object what mean two completely perpendicular concepts. It can be perceived as one or the other depending on point of view of the beholder.

what i gained from this, was that the meaning we retrieve from a object is not just based on interpretation, but the effort that is put in to obtaining it and the experiences held from an object.

I believe someone can find the cultural expressiveness of a object by thinking in light of how they would use it, to uncover a deeper understanding, so that they can relate it in light of its culture.

To observe the idea that an object contains an infinite amount of meaning, concerning the context of its use brings me back around to What Is A Machete, Anyway? written by John Cline, an article circulating the significant meaning behind the machete-- a sharp, long knife. Historically, the machete was created to benefit those within the agricultural world, not to be used as a merciless weapon to end the lives of dozens, or even as a way of war against an oppressor, but because of the limited assets these people had they resulted to using the closest resource they could.

When fixating on this portion of the text, Cline's What Is a Machete, Anyways? comes to mind. Through medieval times, Communist Cuba, a Nicaragua revolution, and a Rwandan genocide the machete took many forms to suit what the farmers or aggressors needed. It moved through stages too, the meaning behind the object changing as time progressed. From a tool for crop season, a weapon of cheap mass destruction, or a symbol of the end of a horrendous white reign over the Hispanics.

For my comparison, I analyzed What Is a Machete, Anyway?, an article written by John Cline in where the author explores the many forms a machete-- an artifact used for centuries in several societies-- has become either a symbol, a tool, or a weapon to those who have come across it.

This is the physical or social setting in which something is being developed, according to Merriam-Webster.

The Prownian Analysis gives space to allow those using it to go through the process of finding many meanings to the object they are researching.

Under the pretense of John Cline's What Is a Machete, Anyway? he describes a variety of settings, where each society would keep a different form to address the use of the sharp object.

Here the web describes "anthropomorphically" as a term in which something takes the human form or carries human characteristics.

According to Merriam-Webster, etymological or etymology is "the history of a linguistic form shown by tracing its development" to its earliest record.

????????

non sequitur

Empathy with an object from an era past seems a bit overboard. All objects carry cultural significance, but in my own opinion, giving emotional relevance to it is a stage too far. Haltman assumes there is no right answer, but even so, there should be objectively wrong answers - those bordering on the ludicrous. Emotional analysis does little to contribute to a complete report on the cultural significance of an object - is the object's importance to the culture from which it came not greater than its importance to you as an observer?

Opposite of the way descriptions are handled in natural sciences, with a heavy emphasis on impersonal and clearly unbiased analysis. Haltman seems to encourage injecting one's own ideas at the potential expense of pure objectivism. This is both positive and negative, as it allows for a more vibrant array of ideas, but also allows for confirmation bias and the assessment of excess meaning to what may have only been a mundane occurrence.

It's quite an extrapolation to move from abstract ideas like life and death to physical, yet subjective measures such as the relative color and shape of an object.

What aspects make some objects more expressive than others?

Characteristics that can be used to identify a connect between an object and and a characteristic.

Here haltman is claiming that objects that have a meaning behind them are culturally significant not because of what they signify, but how they embody this meaning. For an example the Olympic torch's flame represented the "endeavor for protection and struggle for victory." It was first introduced into our Modern Olympics at the 1928 Amsterdam Games. Since then, the flame has come to symbolize "the light of spirit, knowledge, and life." The carrying of the flame is also seen as the passing on the Olympic tradition.

in light of halt-man's text, and in light of the research prospectus i believe that the reader should have a clear sense of what cause that particular interpretation.

I've caught myself doing this before but i didn't realize what the problem was until i read this essay. The, its about a object theme of this article, helped me realize description plays a key part not only in describing a object, but creating ideas from that object.

I believe this Is a problem because students don't actually realize what they are doing until the teacher reviewstheir papers.

In light of the halt-man text, he explained that description is the best access to experiencing a object, because description can the register the way a object may function for a particular person.

Basically it is a physical object that can be touched,named, and described.

I believe student's don't realize what they are lacking in certain skills unless they've been introduced to those skills. And the fact that certain skills are missing from 40 years ago, shows the difference of expectations from 40 years ago to now. So i believe these different expectations are causing teachers to skip the fundamentals, which has made things harder for some students.

I believe this is a way of getting readers and writers more interested in their work. For example, if you wanted to talk about poverty, you would talk about boarded up houses, the man that was sitting on the corner, etc. The use of a object is meant to help create physical connections to that object.

This goes back to haltman's text where he tells the reader to not look for what the object signifies, but how it signifies. I believe both these authors are looking for a gerundial meaning in their work

in light of the halt man text, i believe that some of the small of the features of a object can be important, and conscious analyzation of the features can make make a difference in the meaning that is interpreted from the object.

This metadata is interesting because it is surely to draw a reader in because someone who read's this will wonder have they been truly writing correctly, and read it to check to see if they have been writing correct

I for the first time in a while am actually happy about my work and am taking even more pride in the way it is turning out. In using a physical and concrete website as well I am able to showcase my work and have shown my parents and a couple close friends my work. My meaning has been clear, precise, and descriptive. I can finally "see what I am talking about." I can capture an abstract idea and analyze a feeling and emotion from a physical object such as a quilt panel and found that it is easier than just focusing not the abstract idea. This is the main idea of the Maguire text and what he wishes teachers to incorporate and I believe that every lit class should be this way. If we incorporated the ideas of Haltman,Fowler,Maguire,and Orwell into every writing it would make them great.

I have suffered from the literary disease many times when I get stuck in my writing and have to reach a word count. My writing starts off to be originally clear but the meaning gets blurred over time due to the fact that I have run out of things to say because I am not being concrete or descriptive in my writing. In rading the Haltman text and seeing all the many ways to combat this disease I will have to continuously re-read it to improve my writing when I get stuck,

I have become one of those few in my own personal writing skills.Whenever I come across a word that I do not comprehend or would like to know more about why one selected that word I pull up a new tab and use the definition to understand the writers point of view to understand what message the writer is trying to convey. I had to do this a lot to decipher the meaning of the Haltman text. It has helped the most though; however, during my research on my Gil Scott-Heron AIDS panel. During research I came across a lot of words that made it hard to understand what a writer was trying to say about Scott-Heron's life.

This quote by George Orwell perfectly helps give supporting evidence to the thesis of this text. It not only gives a expert opinion, but masterfully puts the thesis into words. A concrete object requires you to describe something that can be explained through senses and can be very descriptive; however when describing an abstract idea, or something in your head it is so much harder to gather the thoughts in your head and put them down into a comprehendible writing. This entire quote could also be the thesis of the Haltman text, if you make a conscious effort to focus on being descriptive on an object your vocabulary will be precise and clear and make your writing very comprehensible.

I have often done this in my own personal writing and it is interesting to see if from a professional perspective.The Haltman work and Maguire both mention how to work on and help to make this mush into magic. I have also learned over this first unit that being more descriptive leads to more information and more detail and not mush like we have been led to believe. Mrs. A has repeatedly said this during class and Haltma and Maguire have enforced that idea too. As i Have been doing my research I have found this to be true, the more you go in depth in your research and your writing the more there is to talk about. I believe in one's writing there needs to be a deeper pursuit of your subject and I believe that it does help by giving a concrete topic.

I really like this point that Maguire made, I feel that it is a lot harder for students to learn based upon someone's ideas and what is going on in their head. If you can see and smell and touch something it is much easier to obtain your own ideas and your own interpretations and lead to more original and unique writings. I am seeing why we are doing the AIDS quilt as our first project. Something that is concrete reality. To continue with my previous post it is of utmost importance that you first focus on a concrete idea and from that you can gleam the "more abstract, conceptual,or even metaphysical aspects of that culture that they quite literally embody," as Haltman says.

This is very similar to the Primary text in that it reinforces the title of not writing with ideas but with objects. Haltman had a very conscious and specific desire for one to be more descriptive and vivid in the description of concrete items. This type of writing makes it easier for readers to picture and allows them to relate to and imagine one's writing. I have been using this kind of writing in my primary source description and it has helped my writing. These texts are very parallel in their main ideas.

I notice how it is also important that in anything you wish to reform and make better this type of analyzation works. From teachers, to students, to ,mechanics, to managers. One must first assess and list what answers they would like to find or problems they have so that one can improve and reform their work. I have found this helpful when I am stressed out with schoolwork; I would just take a step back and list out what has to be done and when so I do not forget anything and I can plan out my time. This relates to Haltman's point that no information at all is a total failure. One must ask questions and want to improve or you will not move forward. Like Maguire said, it is only "once you ask what skills are missing, you can make a list and start a counter attack." If I do not get any other takeaways from this article I will make sure that I remember to use this skill more often.

This was an important skill that Haltman and Prown talked about. The first step to any good writing is to ask questions and deduct in order to come up with a good analysis. I recently did this in my own project where I came up with a list of at least three research questions that led to me finding some very good sources and finding answers and pathways that I did not even expect. I wonder if the author expected to find what he was looking for or kept an open mind.

This statement is very similar to the thesis of the primary text. Haltman was very focused on transforming your ideas into physical and emotional descriptions of objects. I enjoy how the title grabs your attention by telling you the "secret" immediately instead of making you read to decipher what it is.

The title makes me ask what is the difference?, Why will it only be good and not great? The dictionary difference between a idea and object is: an idea is defined as a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. An object is a person or thing to which a specified action or feeling is directed.

Based upon information alone I feel relates to Haltman and makes your writing better by sorting your suggestions and possibles courses of action into something specified and descriptive and elaborate. This answers my second question because if you do this your writing will be just "good".

This stood out to me because I'm one of those writers. I will know exactly what I mean yet still manage to write vague essays.

As I read through this paragraph I notice that he feels that writing with physical objects helps get your point across in a vivid way compared to being obscure. It takes extra teaching from the teacher and that's why it is over looked. Some teachers rather teach the basics or expect you to know it before registering for that class. What they should know is we are still learning and this is why we're in school... to learn more.

Sadly, I sometimes still lack this skill. Usually when I'm not familiar with the topic I search it to familiarize myself but it still gets worded on the paper weirdly showing that I'm unaware of the object I'm talking about.

This is how a school should operate, fix the problem before it gets out of hand. Once, they noticed the issue they began tackling it. If every school worked this way, maybe students wouldn't come into college discourage in the fact that they have poor writing skills.

Oftentimes, students arrive into a classroom nervous because they aren't good writers and this is true for many. Students in recent years aren't taught to excel college but only to pass high school. This doesn't mean all students but the majority.

This is a skill taught by teachers since elementary school, however every teachers idea of "concrete" is different. Every grade level I go up the idea of concrete becomes deeper and deeper. Now in my freshman year of college I realize that a concrete detail doesn't have t necessarily be the longest description, but it does need to be the most clear description.

Haltman thoroughly covered this in his essay, by stating that writers need to analyze and deduct before annotating to grasp the idea of the reading. This will help when having to describe objects or tell the meaning of a reading.

The title immediately grasped my attention, because I never heard anyone say that before and I was curious to see where the author was going with the piece.

This is the type of conclusion you can only come to if you go beyond what an object physically is and look at its impact on society as a whole. This in itself is reason enough to go deeper.

People will watch anything new and different, even if in days to come they will become extremely mundane.

Further impact beyond the direct effects of domestic television...

Essentially the opposite of the sort of discourse which Haltman promotes. Boyle had to come up with a concrete and complete proof for his ideas.

Already personifying the technology in the second paragraph...

There are still advantages to the CRT over conventional modern TVs - namely the lack of lag. For this reason, some gamers refuse to move on from the cathode ray tube.

This can be good for the developing world because things can be made to make their life better and have better materials. Making 3-D things to help develope a country even more can show how an object can be embodied into a culture just from the helpings it brought them.

I guess this could be cool because you can eventually make an object and become culturally involved with it. Maybe it has culture through the 3-D printing world and is known for special reasons. You can make the first of something and that can be culturalized into history.

This could be related to the Haltman text when he says, When we study an object, formalizing our observations in language, we generate a set of carefully selected nouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, and verbs which effectively determine the bounds of possible interpretation. This is why the words we choose in saying what we see have such far reaching importance. It is out of our paraphrase of what we see that all interpretation grows". This relates because it says what the makers movement needs to do is embrace more views. Ths can come with just getting as many views as you can on something. The more words that are being used to describe an object will make it more intelligent in its own way to others. People will see every object differently so its good to learn and think about someone elses interpretation.

Gentle or kind.

When Haltman says, "Material culture begins with a world of objects but takes place in a world of words" it makes me think that these objects need words to be described, valued, and even how their made, which is true. Taking peoples jobs and pushing aside labor problems is where this connects with the Haltman text. I dont think it would be okay to Haltman that this is going on because like he says you need words for these objects and taking them away or not worrying about them wouldnt solve any issues. Like talking with Mrs.A she says she has a bigger vocabulary than me so she can see and describe an object way better than I can. Words are powerful with objects.

A number of different things or parts that are put or grouped together to form a whole but remain distinct entities.

I think this part is an example of when Haltman talk about the authenticity of the original object. Although you can remake the object it wont be the same as the original. Most people dont really care if the object have a meaning to it unless its part of their "material culture"

This is a part in the text when I was reading I thought was the opposite point of view than the Haltman text. Although he does start off by kind of agreeing, he wants to give a reason as to why maybe people that are opposed to it will maybe see a different point of view. Gives an example saying it discounts the very public contribution to science.

Where people are gonna have the biggest issue with this printer. Boundaries can easily be broken with pattens on things and regulations as well. guns will be able to be made and the government will have no idea.

One of the main things the Haltman text talks about his how the value of an object can not just be recreated into another object. It wont have the same authenticity. Material culture comes from things that people adore and can embody in their culture in some way of their own. Things being made by this machine will have no material culture when it starts to make "everything".

When Haltman states that ones relationship to an object becomes more complex could he be referring to the polarity he mentioned earlier in the text? This complex relationship to 3D printing possibly leading to our own destruction and the polarity of using this for good and evil is exactly what Haltman is refering to when he says “the most persistent object metaphors expressive of belief” seem embedded in polarities.

I wonder if this applies to Haltmans conception of self conciousness? When he states that "The more self-conscious one becomes,the more complex one’s relationship to an object becomes,physically and ocularly as well as psychologically and experientially." Are makers consciously printing there own destruction?

This is an example of the nuanced language Haltman refers to. Descriptive language such as "bowling alone, "self-made man." According to Haltman this "Description provides the bridge between the realm of the material and that of concepts and ideas."

This article being an opinion post reflects Haltman's idea of turning to matters more subjective. Haltman suggest asking yourself "How does the object make you feel?"

This is a perfect example of Haltman's idea of "studying an object to formalize our observations in language." These books and TED talks are a result of Haltman's idea of material culture leading to descriptions and nuanced language. Leading to a better understanding of the object and language as a whole.

Refers to the nearsighted Individualistic approach to the maker movement. It is important because this approach has been infringing on the economic virility of the maker movement as a whole.

Simplistic economic individualism refers to those 3D printing as being disunited. It's important because this disunity could be the downfall of the "maker movement." If united, makers can disrupt the existing economy.

This is similar to the "material culture" that Haltman is referring to. Haltman states "Material culture begins with a world of objects but takes place in a world of words." this extreme capitalistic tent is what makes material culture possible. Which therefore makes it possible to "work“with”material objects,i.e.refer"to"them,the medium in which we work as cultural historians is language." Leading to the study of said objects.

The main text agrees with the supplemental text, by stating that visual analysis and verbal expression go hand in hand. Since the supplemental text is concerning 3D printing of objects and the main text regards using objects to expand language both texts are a fusion of visual analysis and verbal expression.

Both my primary and supplemental text mention polarity. "The persistent object metaphors expressive of belief seem embedded in polarities"The Haltman text mentions them in object metaphors in the same way my supplemental text uses the expression of makers and takers as a metaphor for what is to come with the use of 3D printing.

The supplemental text I am applying is "3D print your way to freedom". This text unlike the "Hallman" text is an online news article discussing the affects of 3D printing on both society and the economy. Whereas Hallman's is an anthology of essays, used to help build a better understanding of things.

In the length of a semester, it may seem that each little assignment is trivial and often times it is challenging to view the bigger picture. What I can see from this course is that each assignment is a culmination of a major assignment and the Prownian Analysis boils that down in a more digestible manner.

This paragraph describes the HIV/AIDS perfectly. I think the main point of each part of the quilt is to engage the viewer as a sort of detective. Every small detail holds a certain weight and one can see themes pop up after more investigation.

The article "3-D print your way to freedom and prosperity" isn't necessarily about polarity, but I think it uses compare and contrast in a bad way. The article jumps from the pros and cons of 3-D printing jarringly, without really establishing a strong opinion on either one.

This serves to be an effective tool for analytical interpretation. Often times, one attempts to perceive the nuances and deeper meaning behind an object right from the beginning. I know this is something that I tend to do. If something can be boiled down to something as basic as the polarities mentioned above, a birds-eye-view can be allocated to an object and zooming into smaller details will be easier.

This is an interesting comment and it helps understand how easy it can be to add subjective bias to a topic. Any kind of personal additions can largely narrow the scope of writing and it can make establishing new topics about a certain object even more challenging.

This is something I have struggled with in the past. Once my questions about certain topics are answered during research, it is difficult to keep my original thoughts in order, since I now know what is fact.

Baxandall makes a good point about pictures and how we use language to truly understand what one is looking at. In the context of objects in general, I think the supplementary text "3-D print your way to freedom and prosperity" sheds some light on how that could change if 3-D printing becomes more commonplace. I think being able to print whatever simple product one needs can change perceptions in a material culture and make certain things lose the value they may have once had.

This statement reminded me of the HIV/AIDS quilt. One can see the quilt objectively. I think the size of the quilt alone gives a good idea of how many people are/were affected. The quilt's subjective and personal appeals are what makes it so effective. Each part of the quilt has a story, family, and a fragment of time that makes it so memorable.

In this context, this statement is very illuminating. In a material culture, such as the one that is being described, the primary focus is on the objects. However, what makes certain objects more important than others in this viewpoint is how words are used to describe. I think a great example of this can be applied to the art world. There are countless talented artists in the world today that have incredible abilities.

This image looks like a picture taken by a camera, but it is actually hand-drawn. In an internet age, this illustration will get likes and favorites on social media, but there probably are not many long, meaningful comments about it.

Meanwhile, if you're shown an image like this one, it's instantly recognizable, and I believe that is largely to do with the amount of language used to describe this painting.

As stated in my secondary reading, describing the object in a concrete way instead of using abstract ideas can enhance your paper

In The Secret to Good Writing, many teachers believe that the ideas are what matter. This caused many of the students to easily get off topic, while Tyre believes that writing about physical objects helps them stay on topic.

Your imagination is critical when performing a task as you may come to a halt with writer's block if you are only thinking abstractly.

When describing an object we have to concisely give our readers or listeners a vivid description of what the object is. Being sure to keep the reader engaged by not floating away from the topic at hand.

When describing an object the better your vocabulary is the more precise you can be when detailing it, we all can look at something and have thoughts on it but how well we can interpret those thoughts matter more. I myself am working on bettering my vocabulary to be able to describe material more concrete.

As in The Secret to Good Writing the difference between writers is those who focus on the object rather than ideas. When you focus on ideas you may end up on a different topic which displays lack of control. While focusing on the object shows communication power.

An object can be viewed in different context depending on a person. As two people from different cultures may view marriage differently. One culture may continue to accept you if you express your concerns with your marriage and believe divorce is the right decision. While another culture may shun you due to your belief.

I agree completely with this statement, as we completed our class activity with our peer we found out the meanings of our objects were different than what we concluded on at first sight.

To lucidly be able to describe an object we have to firstly have an interest in it, as this is the only way we can be drawn into analyzing it.

An artifact can be visualized differently depending on a person and the society they are in or either from. In material culture we oftentimes see items that have a unique meaning for certain that culture. This put me in the mind of my peer as she brought a flag from her country of origin and even though her parents left because of the communistic government, she keeps the entity because it signifies their strengthen as a family, while still embracing her culture.

As I am a student when reading this essay with hopes of one day becoming a scholar at being able to articulate my descriptions of items. As for now this essay gives me insight on the thought process needed to achieve this ability.

A scholar can find importance in all items no matter how insignificant it may seem to a student.

When reading this essay I have to begin with an open mind as some of the text can be interpreted in many ways than one, I should read it and understand in my best ability of how the author would want me to. In my secondary reading "The Secret to Good Writing: It's About Objects, Not Ideas" the author discussed that thinking about things in an abstract way can get you off topic.

" it cannot be denied that the machete is a powerful symbol of violent, popular revolt, a tool/weapon freighted with centuries of significance.("john cline what is a machete anyways?")

This quote form the machete article relates to what is said in this haltman article on a perfect note mostly because the machete had a reputation built around it over the past decades making it to be known as a violent tool.

Description lets us form our own interpretation, Description opens several gates to the ways of how we could think of an object, People visualize things in their own way we account to what we see in something.

Description allows us to explore an open world of ideas to what something can be or could be, I think of History behind an object as one description,propaganda,war, and the use of the object in the past can give us the idea or concept of what material is. In the machete article he mentions movie villains, war, and villagers killing their neighbors this is history, this is the history behind the machete from the experience of others and its portrayal.

Remarks are what beliefs others in society had confirmed to which forms an attitude of some sort towards what the object is. Remarks are capable of forming misconception or even the truth behind material, Otherwise the whole world would have thought the same about certain material we confirm to the Remarks that aligns with our own personal beliefs.

The author is saying we should be clear and precise as much as possible to give the audience a clear idea of what we see with our own eyes and what feelings it imparts to ourselves. The man in the machete article had a similar experience through this with the actions of the machete him giving his own idea in detail of what the instrument is.

To look at a object that you specifically chose and to bring your own interpretation and your own outcome, can lead to opening up new possibilities and new subjects that lead to a deeper understanding of the item. Thereby drawing insight.

Every detail within the object is some sort of instrument to finding the answer to the meaning of it's use,purpose, and what motivates people to use such an object. We should be precise when describing material to indicate what culture lies beneath the object Prown is giving us the idea to incubate ourselves into the object to truly understand it. Patience, we can make an analogy with patience and a mother bird laying on her eggs till the birth of her children, Prown is saying that patience and time allows us to spot the details of an object. This in a way goes along the lines of what the man in "what is a machete anyway" was doing, He held a machete, he used the machete, and he knows what it's capable of doing.

This applies to majority of Sophie's writing in Material Culture, as to looking deeply into the significance of the objectified culture. It is not to look at the surface but to look inside and analyze what couldn't and can't be seen.

As the text suggests, There are questions of how Materials can be socialized with culture. The knowing of mere objects and the collaboration of civilization can lead to many historians questions and philosophies being answered or clearing the ideas. The material culture is not only looking at the object but looking at the deeper meaning.

As being suggested, both life and death are such contrasting concepts yet at the same time go hand-in-hand with each other and also open two different ideologies up for discussion. These prime ideologies open up the connections to how culture, material culture and social theory can be explained metaphorically.

I see Material Culture as a part of history, Material culture is like an guide to the idea of what makes an Object apart of a decade or several events in the past and present. Material Culture is apart of the world and peoples lives in the past and the ones living in the present as of now. When we dig deeper into Material and the culture and significance behind it we began to understand why It is apart of history and why it describes a time and place in the past and the world today.

As I have also wondered, it is questioned how objects can be "gauged for potential cultural expressiveness", although it is signified in the reading of Material Culture that objects can have meaning along with the culture that is align with it at that time.

Although many objects may be very distinguishing, others can have more of a descriptive background. Not only that but also attaching more significance to a person's livelihood and considers the subject of the object that is involved.

People have an idea of what underlies what a machete should be and it's purpose, I believe to have an unconscious belief is to confirm to what others beliefs are within an object. When we have a conscious belief we're able to determine what an object is to us and what are the motives and meaning behind the inanimate object.

An object may be characterized by their physical characteristics, but it is possible to have a different meaning by paying attention to not only physical characteristics but perhaps, a historical one. Thereby allowing said "gerundial meaning"

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/what-is-a-machete-anyway/280705/

The author of the what is a machete anyways had a real experience with the object that made him question himself about the power of a weapon used for fun or a tool whilst turning into a violent weapon. Haltman's statement I believe corresponds to this effectively, it does because this was a psychological experience when the authors friend had grabbed the machete from the bush when they encountered a stranger, They questioned their relationship with the Object making them question their own morals with the use of a dangerous object such as the "machete"

An interpretive analysis should come only after fully understanding a text and the goal it is trying to achieve.

The text is describing how we're obliged to study particular areas of objects within a text scaling from top to bottom, every detail is a part of the blueprint to what makes the object what it is. When I read "What is a Machete, Anyway?" I learned how it became visualized as a symbol for violence, History and it's relation to humans had formed this conception of what a Machete should be. The machete article and Haltman reading correlates with one another since the article goes in depth of the use of Machetes in the past and present.We have to try to understand what makes the object what it is and what's its use for.

It should not be difficult for the reader to follow you in your interpretation of an object. Your thoughts should be clear and concise.

You must think heavily when describing things and think outside the normal thought process. It is your interpretation therefore it should not fall under anyone else's umbrella of ideas.

This statement relates heavily to the supplement reading I have chosen , "The Secret to Good Writing". Describing an object comes from clear and concrete details. Our descriptions of a object helps readers understand the object better, the clear our description, the clearer the object becomes for the reader without actually seeing it.

This aligns the connections between my analysis and reading of Material Culture by Sophie Woodward, which explains the underlying strong connection that historians have with material culture.

People interpret things differently and it can be based off prior beliefs or how you were raised. For example, the term "football", if you grew up in Europe you would think of that word as what we commonly refer to as "soccer". However in the U.S football is a totally different sport. And thats not to say who is right, just a difference in interpretation.

People who study Material Culture are trying to understand the object and what makes it so significant to the culture and/or person. It could be interpreted in so many different ways as well.

This is stating although two objects can both be interpreted, one could be looked at in a deeper sense than the other one. For example, a rock and a laptop are both items that can be described. But because of the laptop's complexity the description can go on longer.

Through reading this text I have t come upon it with an open-mindedness attitude, because different people perceive text differently.

a system of methods used in a particular area of study or activity.

Beginning this reading, I had a very hard time understanding what the author was trying to say and comprehending the extensive vocabulary used. However once I read "The Secret to Good writing" by John Maguire, I have a better understanding of what the text is trying to say. It is basically attempting to describe how to describe objects in a text.

This quote made me think a lot about the entire process of describing an item. Different people have different ideas about things. So descriptions certainly do serve as the latter to objects and individuals concepts and ideas.

It's amazing that even we all look and examine the same item and give a item description of the item and where it comes from they are all not likely to be the same each other

Since the study of material culture involves interpreting the significance of an object's role in one's life, the resulting conclusion will vary from person to person. Though Woodward does not directly state this in Material Culture, it is a given considering the subjectivity involved with interpreting an object's cultural importance.

These writings have various connections that both collectively clash and mix with each other that comprehensively bring the subject of deeper meaning between the study of history and the understanding of it as well.

By following Prownian analysis, one would gain as much understanding through writing about a particular object as they would observing it. Woodward never mentions writing as a part of the process of understanding the cultural significance of an object. Because of this, I believe Haltman's approach would lead to a much more accurate interpretation of an item's significance.

Material culture defines a specific time and is more so a time machine for many objects. It allows fir exploration into a decade if events. Material culture engulfs history and the use of words help us to interpret that history.

This suggests every object studied in material culture is significant, but in order to find its significance we must thoroughly understand the object at question. Aristotle's philosophical concept of teleology, the belief that every object in reality has its own nature and purpose in the world, is highly relevant here since the study of material culture rests on the presumption that teleology is true.

This highlights the importance of contextualizing an object in order comprehend its significance entirely. Woodward agree's with this, emphasizing how the study of material culture combines the natural and social sciences-- allowing us to understand an object's influence within its historical and cultural context.

Through the concept of objectification, Woodward describes the relationship between people and objects as an interconnected, dialectic one. This description implies a kind of constant dialog between an object and person where an object has an equally influential role in its owner’s life as the owner does in the object’s metaphorical life.

Here, Haltman digs deeper into description and advises us on the critical role vocabulary and language has on our ability to accurately interpret an object. In Material Culture, Woodward does not mention the effects of our language on the interpretation of an object considered to be material culture. In fact, she never advises the reader on how to study material culture themselves. Instead, she explains the meaning and history of the study of material culture

Woodward does not explore how/why we choose an object to study in Material Culture like Prown does here. Overall, Woodward does not offer her own opinions or theories regarding material culture, instead her piece reads as highly objective. This is unlike Prown, who offers his personal thoughts and attempts to define abstract concepts throughout the reading in companion to objective concepts as well. For this reason, I prefer the Haltman reading.

The study of material culture is centered upon analytically and methodologically exploring an object's physical properties and evaluating it in the context of the time and space it occupied to determine its cultural significance.

This method allows for the student to create their own research. Although you have to find research this form of analysis puts the core on the students perception. The student creates their own analysis and is directly in the students hands.

The prownian analysis steps refer to a schematic way of which one can form ideas and descriptions of an object. The steps help to elaborate the concepts life/death and effect/impact the object had to a specific culture.

As a college student, I am subject to knowing the depth between the words of the essays that are collectively encased in the volume. This supplemental reading is to allow me to make distinguishing connections with my secondary reading "Material Culture" by Sophie Woodward, which goes into depth with how materials and certain objects can be seen in the world with such a great undertone and description which relates to the Haltman reading

Prown connects to my corresponding reading because the CRT left an impact on the world whether it was positive or negative.The article goes into depth about the history of the object and the CRT is more than material culture but is also viewed as toxic waste. The materials used to create the CRT could cause damage if not properly disposed of. During it's time the CRT left a positive effect on peoples lives by replacing the piano centerpiece in homes. Today, the CRT is not culturally popular it's purpose isn't useful.

The realm of what Prown is trying to get the reader ti understand is that you must know yourself to grasp the complexity of the object as a whole.

This statement explains why there was not necessarily a physical description of the object. Baxandell states that we "don't explain pictures, we describe them." One could be slightly confused with that concept as I was. What is the differentiation between explanation and description?

To the common person there is a normal set of vocabulary that one would understand without question. When one is exposed to a wider range of vocabulary it leads to more knowledge. My corresponding article would be a positive factor to this statement due to the word choice it exposes the reader to.

While describing an object be clear and concise of the detailing. One should pay close attention and be very technical while finding the correct words to describe an object.Be attentive as possible is what Prown is trying to convey. This statement doesn't connect with my secondary article because there weren't much if any descriptions.

This statement in Haltman doesn't support my corresponding reading source because it proceeds to say that with describing material culture that it would be a physical description such as color or texture.The cathode ray tube was not described very much physically.

Haltman connects to the article "A Terminal Condition: The Cathode Ray Tube's Strange Afterlife," because it gives life/death to an object of material culture. The article starts by saying the cathode ray tube is dead and continues to go into depth about the prehistoric tv as it states "rust in peace."

The article does not seem to follow this method of the of analysis as it does not use any of these ways to describe the CRT. It also mainly focuses on the history of the CRT instead of describing and analyzing it. Though certain aspects of the analysis are in the article. For example, research is very apparent through the text.

Both Prown and Sophie Woodward believe that material culture is more of an in-depth understanding and analytical concept versus an explanatory. It is both fascinating to the viewers and draws people in a while at the same time challenging people to implicate their findings to a more extreme extent.

The ideology of material culture has been in motion for numerous years. Many texts portray the years and years of effort that other researchers, authors, and even artists have put in. The entire concept is a observe, focus, and strip down until one can't possibly go any further.

Material culture has been active for years now. The Prownian analysis is by far the most difficult; however, there are other theories and texts to get somewhat of a start to understand this concept. Different approaches can help people gain a better understanding of how to successfully speculate and analyze.

Prown's theory is to focus on the small details and to get a better understanding or to feel what that specific object gives off. The concept of observing and paying attention to details allows for a more focused idea and result. The stronger and descriptive information one entails the better of the analysis will be.

These details and characteristics transform to a more critical idea an object will portray. These descriptions are a few in which people can use to help interpret a specific item they may describe, which allows multiple illustrations to form.

As Prown suggests, to us the readers, that objects express metaphors which then can help elaborate belief to form, the example life and death is a perfect symbol. Life and death are two different theories, but they both open up two entirely different realms of understanding. The example also allows human and material relationships to form, as Sophie Woodward stated in her article.

The thought process and research that takes place while establishing a piece of work as material culture is challenging. Those that are intrigued by the materialistic concept must somehow find a connection to the social theory as well. Focusing and paying attention to even the smallest details allows the entire idea to be understood.

Material culture coincides with different generations and what is appealing to that particular group. Any object or piece of work can become a part of material culture. Material culture as a part is merely an object, an eye appealing material object, but what makes it metaphorical is the deeper meaning that resides behind a specified item. At the end of any material culture, the whole picture and the idea is to conceptualize a material to the culture.

Through the Prownian analysis, scholars will learn how to experientially categorize various objects that are always around every individual on a daily basis. Alongside with the observing part, scholars will become more metaphorically and analytically inclined versus just scrapping the surface and merely trying to settle for average. Both Prownian analysis and material culture allow individuals to see the world from a different viewpoint and change the notion of learning. As the culture changes, so do the learning techniques and the dominion that that surrounds it.

This realm of work and research focuses on both the object and the meaning it portrays. The entire ideology of material culture has many genres established thus making it much more of a study and regular observing practice.

All interpretations and analysis of meaning of an item to a culture are based upon interpretations of the mind. In machete some interpret the item as a weapon, some as a tool. This shows how different items can be interpreted and all the varieties and way the mind can interpret something based on experiences.

the interpreters own input is most important to prownian analysis, which is shown by the analysis of the machete clearly. If you see it as a tool, you wouldn't believe that someone should get in trouble for having something such as a shovel at an event, but if you see it as a weapon that would be opposite, simply based of interpretation.

The meanings of objects and those objects to cultures lies in how they have been used, perceived, and analyzed previously. The machete is seen to many as a weapon, and many as a tool which polarizes the item and makes it a hot topic when brought to an event such as an election. It is all based off the theme that the object has played in past events in the perceivers mind.

This sentence hits on an important lesson the machete reading taught me, which is how important human perception is in analyzing an object. It is all based on a person and the experiences they have had with an object and how they then perceive that object based on said experiences.

How people paraphrase and refer to an object, determines how that object is interpreted in our minds. Based of the human experiences others have had, combined with yours is how you interpret an object and the significance to culture.

Objects such as a machete, or those which can give two humans very different experiences, tend to be the most analyzed and talked about in culture.

This sentence stands out to me as my human experiences linked to machetes are horror movies, used to kill and maim people. Other human experiences change the way you look at an object, no matter what the object is.

To me, carrying a machete around is equal to carrying around a huge knife, but to people who work the fields of Haiti, a machete represents a tool to gather meat and vegetables, and put food on the table that night.

The machete in a public place such as an election might be said to signify a weapon, but to someone such as a farmer it could just be a tool they forgot to put away before the event and just a tool such as a shovel.

Culture that takes material form can represent so much more to a culture than simply what it is. A material item can represent ideas, strengths, and what is important to a culture. To a farmer or livestock owner, a machete is seen as a tool, but to others it can be considered an objected, just as the supplemental reading, what is a machete anyways? suggests.

Haltman Annotations

• Prownian analysis?

• "finding value in particular historical interpretations proposed by teapot ... students will find value in learning from the models..." this makes me think. Is this Prownian analysis. is this what makes writing better

• objects are like a physical piece of history, so this is kind of where the material culture term relates. We have to try to understand this

• we have to seek their cultural significance. In The secret to good writing, it was also brought up how objects mean so much more and have so much significance. I believe that is a way these are connected.

• It was stated also in The secret to good writing that all abstract ideas come from objects. that is another connection to understand.

• it is important to observe the object, pay careful attention to its aspects, be attentive for detail but keep an eye on the "big picture" .. this is a great point and will help with future writing. Observe closely and think deeply

• engage with the object on an intense and intellectually level? its more than describing an object

• prownian analysis .. a way of reading history?

• "We see articulation and deduce patterns of use; we see interaction and deduce relationship; we see expression and deduce reception" this is a bit confusing to understand. in other words does it mean to break down and evaluate.

• "Material culture begins with a world of objects but takes place in a world of words." this quote is relatable to the main idea of the secret of good writing I believe objects are the foundation for all abstract ideas

• The Prownian analysis process great if needed to look deeper into an object.

• Haltman makes me think of what was stated by Tyre in her article the secret to good writing she stated that "Student papers are often unreadable not only because their grammar is bad and their sentences incomplete, but also because they are way, way too abstract."

• The two articles relate yet they are different. I feel the composition is different yet the concepts are similar.

• Both articles relate to ways to improve writing and open the mind to new ideas about how to approach writing about a particular thing or object.

"3-D print your way to freedom and prosperity" by Jathan Sadowski

"The maker movement embraces a kind of naively apolitical, techno-economic, capitalist utopia that thrives on individualistic value" (Sadowski). This quote has it's own section in this article and provides a strong mantra for the phenomenon that is 3-D printing. Jathan Sadowski, a Ph.D. student at Arizona State University, talks about the concept of 3-D printing and how versatile it can be. The article begins with comments made by Barack Obama a State of the Union address from 2013. "'Three-D printing [has] the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything,' he said." Sadowski agrees with this and brings up a lot of points about the benefits of 3-D printing, such as the ability to be creative, ease of accessibility, and individualism and power given to the entrepreneurial mind. However, Sawoski argues that these very benefits fit well into "the Californian Ideology". This theory suggests that high-tech entrepreneurs can bypass the regulations and systems that have been established. However, these systems would not be broken or disrupted, but would actually stay the same. Sadowski makes another strong point about what dangers could be presented in easily-accessible 3-D printing. Since manufacturing regulations can be so easily disregarded when 3-D printing, dangerous products can be made. Sadowski writes about Cody Wilson, "a founder of Defense Distributed, [who] designed, prototyped, and posted plans for a working 3-D-printed plastic handgun he called the Liberator."

This article was written in 2014, when 3-D printing was still a very new concept and the potential for what could be created and which huge conglomerates could be toppled where boundless. However, the years have past and 3-D printing has slowly crept away from the mainstream media and dinner table conversations. The equipment needed to 3-D print a few years ago was still not consumer-friendly, but now you can buy 3-D printers for a few hundred dollars. Many schools around the United States have 3-D printers that are accessible to schools. I believe that the 3-D printing concept was always destined for small-scale usage. The flexibility to create whatever someone needs works best in a small-scale, because these products being printed do not have to go through the quality control that bigger manufacturers. I think the Californian Ideology did eventually come true, but under a different pretense. I think that the "system" was not impacted by 3-D printing because the bigger financial piece of the pie is the manufacturing of the 3-D printers, not so much the products being printed.

Source: Sadowski, Jathan. "3-D print your way to freedom and prosperity." Al Jazeera, 17 May 2014, http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/5/3d-printing-politics.html.

Objects can be interpreted by beliefs that are prominent in object or some that are more hidden but nonetheless important. It is simply a matter of correctly interpreting and trying to go into as much detail as possible to gain the best results.

This is a true statement and is relevant to the project. The first day we visited the quilt gallery, i chose the panel i wanted to work with and wrote down some ideas that i could use for the project later on. Ever since, i have looked back about 3 times and each time i think of new ideas and new interpretations of the panel, whether it be the color scheme, the materials the people used, or the statements they places on the panel. Every time, I found out something different and more unique from the panel. In conclusion, this statement is very true. The more time and effort one puts into something, the better the results.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/63120832258611250/

in simpler words this means that the essays written are meant to show a different perspective on things or a different way of thinking. I am guessing Haltman will explain how to properly interpret and object or ways of doing do throughout the reading.

In society we pick an object and give it a deeper meaning. Haltman explains that material culture, as in how we interpret objects in society, more or less is given more meaning than the object has as an object. So, an object can be chosen, then it is given a deeper meaning through language and literature.

Haltman, in this section of the reading, gives examples on how to interpret an object. He suggests we use "polarities" because often times this will be easier to identify how the object looks, what it feels like, etc. However, this interpretation is only physical.

The Mohegan baskets contain so much detail in them that some one would need to spend more time to view them and understand, than if they just see a text or meaningless painting. Typically history will be told to us through a book or text that we an read word for word and figure out what happened or we will see a painting or picture that gives us an image of exactly what something may have looked like. To understand these baskets and their stories we must switch our way of thinking or we won't ever understand them, or it may take a long time. In order to really perceive the intended meaning of the basket we must completely indulge into their culture.

The creation of these baskets was the Mohegans way of story telling. These baskets told the story of the history the Mohegan culture has gone through. Therefore, many of the creators of these baskets opted to not sign them because they would basically be taking credit for what the Mohegan culture has gone through and their history. If the basket creator were to sign the basket that would be considered very Western and often times were just sold as baskets instead of Mohegan baskets, because they were looked at as having no meaning to the Mohegan tribe

In the Western culture we are more accustomed to viewing old artifacts as text, that specifically tells exactly what was going on at the time depending on the author. In the native (Mohegan) culture they do this differently. These baskets and the symbols on them are of strong importance.(I.E. Trial of Life symbol). Shifting to the Mohegan perspective of story telling, of symbols and designs from what we are routinely used to seeing, which is texts, can be difficult. This often times causes us as the Western community to look at these Mohegan painted baskets as simply designs or decoration, when they are in fact telling a story that has previously had a heavy impact on the Mohegan culture.

The medallion has 4 different parts to it. Four half Circular Domes, Four Trees, 13 dots around the center circle, and the red Center Circle. All of these parts of the medallion relate to the Earth and the past generations of the Mohegan tribe. According to a website dedicated to the meaning of the Mohegan flag. The meaning of the four semicircular domes point to each of the four sacred directions, represent "Grandfather Turtle upon whom the earth was formed " The four diagonal lines are four sacred trees reminding us of the"The Sacred Tree" or the "Tree of Life", which is a design seen a lot on Mohegan baskets.

Ann McMullen said that she beleived once the Natives were forced to leave their land that they would no longer be able to keep their Mohegan identity due to the fact that they would be forced to move and share land with other Native groups that have their own beliefs and cultures. What McMullen said would end up being somewhat correct. After the "Trail of Tears", a significant part of the Mohegan culture ended up lost due to leaving their land. This happened to many cultures and the results are typically the same with them losing a large part of the identity they once had on their land before being forced out. (Sioux, American Buffalo, etc)

Due to the fact that the Mohegan culture and ways of life are so different from the Western culture, it makes it hard for a lot of us in the Western culture to fully understand the value of certain objects in their cultures. In our current culture a basket has no religious traditional, or cultural value at all. It also makes us look at our current culture and how a lot of things that we use everyday have no meaning to it in our mind, but yet it is a big part of our culture and the knowledge of some of these things could help someone outside of our culture understand us more. Just because things are different than our cultural norm does not mean we should discredit its value for another culture.

Mohegan baskets are used for everyday use by the Natives but also used fro cultural purposes, religious purposes, and traditional purposes. Trying to learn and figure out all of the purposes that these woven baskets are used for can help us learn a lot about the Mohegan culture and their specific way of life in comparison to other native cultures.

The practice of making the woven basket is more of a role that the women take on instead of the men of the community. Women were very important within the Mohegan Culture. They were very well known in the areas that they lived in for creating these baskets and selling them as well as keeping the culture and beliefs together. This is clear because the baskets were intended to fully represent what the culture believed and stood for. Women held many positions of power in the Mohegan culture and the basket making was one of these positions.

These Mohegan Basket are meant to keep the culture going and not forgotten. It is meant to remind the current natives of where they started and where they come from. After the large migration, many people of the culture died and then after they had a hard time holding onto the culture. This can be compared to the ways that the Black Lives Matter Movement did such an amazing way of gaining awareness to the issue. The hashtag #blacklivesmatter was not widely known at first. However since the Trayvon Martin case was announced the Black Lives Matter Movement has made strong efforts to inform people on police brutality. Black Lives Matter made improvements on gathering awareness on the issue, but they still face adversity from people who may not understand its purpose. However, with them continuing to share this message relates to how the Mohegan culture continues to hold on their identity.

The symbols an designs on the baskets represent natural landscape and Mohegan Cosmology. Gladys Tantaquidgeon was a Mohegan medicine woman, anthropologist, author, and tribal council member. She said "to the Mohegan, designs and life are more than simple representations of nature. There is a spiritual force that flows through all things, and if these symbols are true representations of that force, this spirit should be expressed in these designs." To many these designs may not look attractive and if we do not Mohegan cosmology than we have no chance at understanding what they mean. However these baskets have a large power in them to the Mohegan culture. This compares easily with "The Life of an Object ". These baskets do more than just symbolized something. In the Digital Curation project, the student is forced to think of what the object does, rather than what it symbolizes because that would leave the value of it completely up to the viewer. These Mohegan baskets are more than a representation of the culture, they are a part of it.

Baskets were a big part of daily life for Native Americans. Many families had their own family design that they used when weaving baskets. Most of the time though, it was women trying to outdo each other with different designs and colors. Since baskets were made in the winder months, the women of the tribe would spend all summer preparing themselves for the winter. they would gather material to make such baskets. For example, grass was a big part of the basket making process. It was used like a thread, and the women of the tribe would collect a certain type of grass, because of the color and strength of it. They would hike into the mountains, which was a very dangerous thing to do, just to get the right grass for basket weaving. Once the baskets were made they would be used for storage for food and supplies for their shops, as well as using it for trade. Basket making is considered an art to these people, and secret techniques would be passed down from mother to daughter throughout various generations.

According to the Mohegan tribe website, there was a tradition about a giant named Moshup. He represented the large and great beings. in order to keep balance, Moshup marries Granny Squannit, leader of the woodlands little people. There are many stories about Moshup in Mohegan tradition, but there is one story that talks about the landscape of Connecticut. Moshup was trying to build a bridge to the mainland when a crab bit his foot. Angered by this, he used his fiery temper and began throwing stones all over Connecticut, which explains why the landscape there today is very rocky.

Summary of Supplemental Text: http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2015-runner-up-black-lives-matter/ Black Lives Matter by Alex Altman

The article described the creation and impact of the Black Lives Matter Movement. This movement was born out of the sheer amount of reported domestic abuse, inequality, and injustice claims that were witnessed towards African American individuals across the United States. Since the outcomes of cases like Freddie Gray, Trayvon Martin, and others, the Black Lives Matter Movement has looked to shed light on the importance of this issue in society that was thought to have been "fixed" after the Civil Rights Movement. Though BLM has made strides in sharing awareness, they have and currently face strong opposition from right-wing politics and others who disapprove of their validity. Through this, they continue to share their passion for sharing their message as a movement in history.

As modern society continues, the problem of non-traditional artforms being neglected as writing does not cease to continue. In the case of the Black Lives Matter Movement, they are looked at as more of a gang figure at times than an empowering movement, set to shed light on important issues on society. As a historical set-piece, BLM allows our society and look back to see the injustice that black individuals faced and see the change that was called for and asked by the people of the United States of America. As much as many individuals on the opposing viewpoint believe that Black Lives Matter was insignificant, it was a major turning point. This movement, though not a traditional form of written text, can be easily be seen as a historical record marking a turning point, much like the civil rights movement.

Much like how Fitzgerald states that the basket "serves to rein-scribe Mohegan history and cosmology into everyday life". The Black Lives Matter serves the same purpose in their fight against inequality. Through the movement, the black struggle is displayed through everyday life, whether it be police interactions or simple interactions with others. By doing this, the inequality and injustice is spread and seen through all aspects of everyday life http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2015-runner-up-black-lives-matter/

As Fitzgerald begins to peer into the symbolic meaning and analysis of the basket, she sees a much different story. She uses her knowledge of the Mohegan culture to view the basket through a native lense. She sees the amalgamation of "tradition symbols" that "fuse Mohegan History and Cosmology" to tell the story of their migration. Rather than assuming it to show their disconnect from their culture, the basket represents their journey to creating a new settlement.

Haltman explains there are more to an object than what meets the eye. The conclusion that archaeologist have discovered is a 10,000 year crayon or writing tool. Beyond i being a crayon is what the crayon represents. I represents literacy which is used to record or transform information that was 10,000 years ago.

How does the ancient crayon "Let" archaeologists draw conclusions? Haltman said in other words, objects have a meaning behind it even if they just look like a certain thing. If you analyze it more fruitfully then you can learn from the culture in which they come from. The "crayon-like object" has a deeper meaning than it just being a crayon. Being that it is 10,000 years old it helped the archaeologists understand more of the Mesolithic settlers culture and lives after they analyzed it into further detail.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/what-is-a-machete-anyway/280705/

The machete initially known as a tool is now seen as a weapon used to intend harm when seen in the hands of criminals. The machete is a tool previously used by farmers or people in rural areas, they would use the machete to cut grass, or other resources they acquired.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/what-is-a-machete-anyway/280705/

Machetes are considered a cheap alternative for guns, neighbors had the utilities to slaughter each other with the own tools they used in their own fields, The use of machetes lead to genocides destroying tutsi people. Ordinary people would have rather used the machete for gruesome activities. The machete once a simple tool has grown to become a symbol for violence in the present.